“I’ll be home for Christmas” is rarely the favorite song of global kingdom workers. Even if they can get home for Christmas, they probably aren’t sure where that is. And they are not the only ones.

I’ve made a case for changing our language for global workers because of issues surrounding the title “missionary.” However, even if I’ve made a compelling case and you’ve bought into the need to make this change, that doesn’t mean you have a clear path forward for implementing such a change.

There are more thoughts to consider as we examine the issues associated with the word “missionary.”

How can an organization named Mission Resource Network even consider stopping their use of the word "missionary"? And why would we want to do so? That's a big subject that will take several blog articles to explain. But I think the time has come for us to wrestle with the complex and troubling history that is inescapably bound up with the word "missionary."

The last blog article from one of my MRN co-workers prompted a lot of great questions and comments. I've really appreciated the feedback and will write future blogs to address some of the things I heard. However, one response seems very common among Americans, even those who are deeply immersed in cross-cultural relationships

In my last blog, I shared about differences and confusions between cultures that communicate directly versus indirectly. Many of us have recognized these differences but have not understood them.

Few things in life are more challenging to manage than conflict. But even fewer things are more common. We don't always agree. We want our way, and we want to preserve our relationships with others who disagree. That's a recipe for trouble. It doesn't matter how close we are, how much we love each other, or how similar our thinking is; we still won't always agree. Conflict is part of life and is never easy, especially with people who are important to us.

It is unusual for every Christian to have a personal copy of the Bible, from a historical perspective. We take it for granted that everyone can read their copy of the Bible by themselves so much that we make it an indispensable practice for spiritual health. While I’m all for every follower of Jesus reading their Bibles regularly, and I do so as part of my daily routine, there are some downsides to private Bible reading.

It is a given that all followers of Jesus should seek to be people of integrity. However, because ethical practices are partly determined by cultural values and expectations, being honorable people can be complicated when we engage in cross-cultural partnerships. Without realizing it, Americans can cause their international partners to lose credibility as good people in their local settings.

The pandemic has been hard for everyone everywhere. We could unpack all the struggles for many pages. At MRN, it was hard for us not to be able to travel internationally for well over a year. It isn't just that it was impossible to complete some of our work from the States or that Zoom is less effective than in-person meetings. Even more challenging was the emotional hit our staff took in our motivation when we could not see the impact of our work in person.

While this can be good because we can share stories of what God is doing around the world and get more people excited and involved, it has some significant downsides we need to think through and train for before we send people, or go, on STMs.

“Indeed, it is as though Christianity, wherever it went in the modern colonies, inverted its sense of hospitality. It claimed to be the host, the owner of the spaces it entered, and demanded native peoples enter its cultural logics, its ways of being in the world, and its conceptualities.” – Willie James Jennings

“I can’t get many people in my world interested in global missions. It seems to many of them that missions is a black hole that consumes vast resources and produces little impact.”